Preferences, intentions, and expectation violations: A large-scale experiment with a representative subject pool

被引:26
作者
Bellemare, Charles [1 ]
Kroeger, Sabine [1 ]
van Soest, Arthur [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Laval, Dept Econ, Quebec City, PQ G1K 7P4, Canada
[2] Tilburg Univ, Tilburg, Netherlands
关键词
Inequity aversion; Intentions; Subjective expectations; BEHAVIOR; ATTRIBUTIONS; RECIPROCITY; FAIRNESS; OUTCOMES; AVERSION;
D O I
10.1016/j.jebo.2011.01.019
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
We specify and estimate an econometric model which separately identifies the effects of distributional preferences and penalizing unfair proposer behavior ("perceived intentions") on responder decisions in the ultimatum game. We allow the effects of perceived intentions to depend, among other things, on the subjective probabilities responders attach to the possible offers. The latter allows expectation violations to be a driving force for responder behavior. We estimate the model on a large representative sample from the Dutch population. We find that the relative importance of distributional preferences and perceived intentions depends significantly on the socio-economic characteristics of responders. Strong inequity aversion to the other player's disadvantage is found for lower educated and older respondents. Responders tend to punish more unequal offers made by proposers if they expect that unequal proposals are made less often. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:349 / 365
页数:17
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2002, Discrete choice methods with simulation
[2]  
Ball S., 1996, Research in Experimental Economics, V6, P239
[3]   Measuring inequity aversion in a heterogeneous population using experimental decisions and subjective probabilities [J].
Bellemare, Charles ;
Kroeger, Sabine ;
Van Soest, Arthur .
ECONOMETRICA, 2008, 76 (04) :815-839
[4]   On representative social capital [J].
Bellemare, Charles ;
Kroger, Sabine .
EUROPEAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2007, 51 (01) :183-202
[5]   Evaluations of ingroup and outgroup members: The role of category-based expectancy violation [J].
Bettencourt, BA ;
Dill, KE ;
Greathouse, SA ;
Charlton, K ;
Mulholland, A .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1997, 33 (03) :244-275
[6]   WHEN SOCIAL OUTCOMES ARENT FAIR - THE EFFECT OF CAUSAL ATTRIBUTIONS ON PREFERENCES [J].
BLOUNT, S .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 1995, 63 (02) :131-144
[7]   ERC: A theory of equity, reciprocity, and competition [J].
Bolton, GE ;
Ockenfels, A .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2000, 90 (01) :166-193
[8]   When do fair beliefs influence bargaining behavior? Experimental bargaining in Japan and the United States [J].
Buchan, NR ;
Croson, RTA ;
Johnson, EJ .
JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, 2004, 31 (01) :181-190
[9]  
Carpenter JP, 2005, RES EXP ECO, V10, P261
[10]   Intention and stochastic outcomes: An experimental study [J].
Charness, Gary ;
Levine, David I. .
ECONOMIC JOURNAL, 2007, 117 (522) :1051-1072